Rethinking the Queensway

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

A large percentage of the traffic using Nicolas are heading to Gatineau. My suggestion (which I forgot to mention) would be to time this change with the opening of an alternate route to Gatineau (be it the "truck" tunnel, a Kettle Island bridge or some other routing), King Edward could then handle the remaining displaced traffic (with minor modifications, like the removal of street parking).

As for Colonel By, I don't believe it is an effective vehicular link and the city would be better without it.

Colonel By provides a good link to the airport, particularly for VIP-type visitors. We can still pretend we're a capital city sometimes. Past Bronson it could probably go if politicians don't mind pissing off commuters in Nepean.

In addition to Quebec traffic, as LRTfriend pointed out, Nicholas is the main link to downtown (as well as the Rideau Centre and market area) link from the east and south. The Metcalfe exit has a complicated detour around the museum. King Edward couldn't handle the displaced traffic at all. Downtown-bound traffic would have to turn left at from King Edward to Laurier, which can in no way replace the double left turn lane onto Laurier at Nicholas.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Also, I assume you didn't plan on tearing down the Citadel Apartments north of Lees Ave and adjacent to Lees Ave Station and replace them with low density housing. This is a prime location for high density housing.

It was just easier to paste a picture over it. It would be a perfect place for some high-density development, right beside Lees LRT and the new (eventual?) Lees campus.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Colonel By provides a good link to the airport, particularly for VIP-type visitors. We can still pretend we're a capital city sometimes.

So you suggest we keep it so VIPs can have a scenic route to the airport?

Past Bronson it could probably go if politicians don't mind pissing off commuters in Nepean.

Between Hogs Back and University Dr. it is useful as a route to Carleton.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

So you suggest we keep it so VIPs can have a scenic route to the airport?

Among other reasons, yes.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Between Hogs Back and University Dr. it is useful as a route to Carleton.

It would be a pretty minor inconvenience to go to Bronson.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

It would be a pretty minor inconvenience to go to Bronson.

But you are leaving the campus with a single point of entry. It is isolated enough as it is basically being surrounded by water on 3 sides. An accident closing Bronson near the entrance and no one can get in or out (other than by train).

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by roger1818

But you are leaving the campus with a single point of entry. It is isolated enough as it is basically being surrounded by water on 3 sides. An accident closing Bronson near the entrance and no one can get in or out (other than by train).

I was once a Carleton student and during my years there, I remember a flood that closed the Bronson entrance. At that time, there was no rail access so the only way in was by Colonel By Drive.

[1overcosc]

I'm not sure taking out Nicholas and re-routing traffic down King Edward is a good idea. You'd be sending a lot of traffic into the heart of Sandy Hill...

That said, we shouldn't be too fussed about maintaining a high vehicle capacity going into and out of the the core. The majority of peak period downtown commuters get there by transit, and outside of peak periods traffic flows very well.

Hence why projects like the O'Connor bikeway are good ideas--literally the only traffic pattern inconvenienced by taking a lane away from O'Connor is downtown peak period commuters, and transit already serves that trip pattern very well.

Something as radical as tearing out Nicholas and sending traffic instead down narrow King Edward south & Laurier East, though, is too much.

[Ottawaresident]

Originally Posted by eemy

If the ring expressway that the MTO was planning at one time ever goes forward, it might allow the Queensway to be turned into a urban boulevard in the central area by diverting most of the cross-town traffic.

I don't think so. I livenear the Queensway and I know that it is congested and the highway is a link to downtown. If the River Parkway and the Sir George Etienne are upgraded and extended it might work.

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by HighwayStar

Why are highways dependent on oil?? Electricity, hydrogen, propane and probably a bunch of other stuff powers vehicles just fine

oil is used to make roads and other stuff.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by HighwayStar

Why are highways dependent on oil?? Electricity, hydrogen, propane and probably a bunch of other stuff powers vehicles just fine

The question is how can we generate enough electricity, hydrogen, etc to meet societies veracious need for energy?

As for propane (and natural gas), it is "cleaner" than other fossil fuels, but in terms of CO2 (a clean pollutant) it isn't much better than gasoline or diesel (though it is much better than coal). Here is a chart from the US EIA of lbs of CO2 emitted per BTU :

Diesel fuel and heating oil  161.3

Gasoline (without ethanol)   157.2

Propane                      139.0

Natural gas                  117.0

[Ottawaresident]

Is this some page about the energy production or tearing down the Queensway?

[Gat-Train]

Originally Posted by Ottawaresident

Is this some page about the energy production or tearing down the Queensway?

The discussion pivoted to energy forms, because it's hard to predict what inter-urban transportation will be like in 2098. In fact, we may have completely different, unforeseen tech, that was as unpredicted as the automobile when it first came out.

[Kitchissippi]

Found this on the internet:
https://indd.adobe.com/view/62929d06-3f71-4406-90b5-998b046b8d62

[Dengler Avenue]

This actually looks good. The only thing is, MTO's working on widening 417 right now. Maybe a decade later (Or even after we build the Ottawa Bypass) ...? I hope the speed limit will still be 100 km/h even through the tunneled section though.

[eltodesukane]

[CityTech]

Tunneling the Queensway is something that makes more sense in a couple decades once most cars will be electric. No tailpipe emissions = way easier to build tunnels. If we did this, we could institute an electric vehicles only rule for the new tunnel.

[White Pine]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The Confederation Line does not and cannot replace the Queensway. It just replaces the Transitways.

The Queensway serves commuters that are poorly served by transit for the most part.

I think this is about right. Before anything else, the C line is underbuilt for such a thing. also, being from Pembroke, the Queensway gives access to people who don't live in Ottawa. I tried looking into OCTranspo's park in rides and by what I could tell you need a monthly pass to park there. The malls don't allow you to use their lots as one either-- though I'm not sure how they would enforce that. So any non-commuter who needs to go to Ottawa for a day (or pretty much at all) needs to drive in.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by White Pine

I think this is about right. Before anything else, the C line is underbuilt for such a thing. also, being from Pembroke, the Queensway gives access to people who don't live in Ottawa. I tried looking into OCTranspo's park in rides and by what I could tell you need a monthly pass to park there. The malls don't allow you to use their lots as one either-- though I'm not sure how they would enforce that. So any non-commuter who needs to go to Ottawa for a day (or pretty much at all) needs to drive in.

Huh I didn’t know you live in Upper Ottawa Valley. You’re the first person that I’ve encountered on SSP that’s from there. I vaguely remember you commenting in my TCH thread too.

Yea speaking of TCH, that’s another reason The Queensway can’t be demolished... yet (unless and until a bypass be built), because it doesn’t just serve Ottawa but cross-country traffic too. (I believe that once we extend 417 to as far as even North Bay, a lot of trucks may no longer use QC-117 but instead ON-417 then ON-11.)

Lastly, the new crossing to take trucks off Lower town is supposed to be like a freeway, IIRC...?

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Huh I didn’t know you live in Upper Ottawa Valley. You’re the first person that I’ve encountered on SSP that’s from there. I vaguely remember you commenting in my TCH thread too.

Yea speaking of TCH, that’s another reason The Queensway can’t be demolished... yet (unless and until a bypass be built), because it doesn’t just serve Ottawa but cross-country traffic too. (I believe that once we extend 417 to as far as even North Bay, a lot of trucks may no longer use QC-117 but instead ON-417 then ON-11.)

Lastly, the new crossing to take trucks off Lower town is supposed to be like a freeway, IIRC...?

As someone who went to North Bay for college and did a fair bit of journeying down that highway, I don't see the 417 ever being extended that far. I can see it maybe reaching as far as Pembroke and Petawawa, but that's it. Beyond that, there's really nothing of note. If anything, I could sadly see an expansion of the 60 given the popularity of Algonquin Park and providing improved 'access' to Huntsville and the Muskoka region. The Upper Ottawa Valley is just too sparse and remote.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

As someone who went to North Bay for college and did a fair bit of journeying down that highway, I don't see the 417 ever being extended that far. I can see it maybe reaching as far as Pembroke and Petawawa, but that's it. Beyond that, there's really nothing of note. If anything, I could sadly see an expansion of the 60 given the popularity of Algonquin Park and providing improved 'access' to Huntsville and the Muskoka region. The Upper Ottawa Valley is just too sparse and remote.

I’m open to the idea of “460” from Renfrew to Huntsville too. In fact I’ve thought about it for quite a bit.

The thing is, plans have been in place to have the freeway go from North Bay to Renfrew/Nipissing boundary. Granted, from there to the CFB, there’s still ~100 km to go. But having freeways on both ends then 2-lane road in the middle? Okay...?
I’m the type that says “we may as well bridge the gap”. That’s just me though.

Thanks for your input too.